This is a terrible article. Even if you drill down to the specific point "some people aren't sure vacancy taxes will help", there is a near total lack of anyth

This is a terrible article. Even if you drill down to the specific point "some people aren't sure vacancy taxes will help", there is a near total lack of anything remotely resembling an explanation for why they think that might be true. The closest thing is an analysis of Vancouver and how some people hoped it would help vacancy rates more but it didn't. Well, you know what else fits that description in spades? Adding supply. Everybody says "build more housing and the prices will come down" and... they don't. The 2nd derivative bends, prices increase more slowly but they do. not. drop. until the demand side does. But you don't see anybody writing Bloomberg articles about how we shouldn't build more or saying some economists are not so sure adding supply works. People are sure adding supply works because it fits a simple model. And it probably does help more than not adding supply, even if the financial dynamics are such that it only produces mild effects. Vacancy taxes deserve at least as much currency in these discussions. And probably more if this article is an example of a substantial case against them.